If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Intel Core i7 4770K "Haswell" Benchmarks On Ubuntu Linux

06-04-2013, 12:20 PM

Phoronix: Intel Core i7 4770K "Haswell" Benchmarks On Ubuntu Linux

This past weekend I shared the first experiences of running Intel's new Haswell CPU on Linux. While Intel Haswell is a beast and brings many new features and innovations to the new Core CPUs succeeding Ivy Bridge, there were a few shortcomings with the initial Linux support. It still appears that the Core i7 4770K is still being finicky at times for both the processor and graphics, but in this article are the first benchmarks. Up today are benchmarks of the Intel Core i7 4770K when running Ubuntu 13.04 with the Linux 3.10 kernel.

Comment

For at least some of these benchmarks, compiler settings should make a substantial difference: it would be interesting to see the comparison between SSE4 vs AVX vs AVX2 enabled executables for Himeno on i7-4770K, for example. I would not make serious scientific use of a Haswell without compiling my programs for that architecture!

Comment

I thought, as for CPU performance, it is expected to be only marginally better than IB. The real improvements are in graphics.

@Michael: it would be great to see a three way graphics comparison: Haswell vs Richland Open Source vs Richland Catalyst, now that the Richland APUs are also out.

My home desktop is an AMD phenom first gen rig with ATI entry level graphics. The ATI GC is no longer supported by Catalyst (thanks!), and the open source stack works great for multimedia and ok for 3D, but a lot of the humble bundle games will not run (and run instead on my son's $200 intel's chromebook, which makes you wonder).

I think Richland is a great value for an APU (mobo's are also cheaper), and I would definitely buy an a10-6800k if I were a Windows user, but as it stands, as a Linux user, my only sane option is Intel. I try to buy AMD when I can, because I want to see competition in the desktop CPU space, but hell, are they making it hard for me.

Comment

I thought, as for CPU performance, it is expected to be only marginally better than IB. The real improvements are in graphics [snip...]

Except for scientific codes, where the AVX2 instruction set offers the potential of doubling the floating-point performance for codes doing LINPACK-style (array AX+B) computations. I would expect Himeno to be such a code; I know that the environmental modeling/forecasting codes I develop and use have those characteristics for a substantial chunk of their execution-profiles.

Comment

Except for scientific codes, where the AVX2 instruction set offers the potential of doubling the floating-point performance for codes doing LINPACK-style (array AX+B) computations. I would expect Himeno to be such a code; I know that the environmental modeling/forecasting codes I develop and use have those characteristics for a substantial chunk of their execution-profiles.

Comment

The PTS table on page 1 shows different scaling governors being used for the different processors (intel_pstate powersave and acpi-freq ondemand). From the documentation, the "powersave" mode of the intel_pstate "sets the CPU statically to the lowest frequency within the borders of scaling_min_freq and scaling_max_freq" (governors.txt).

Unless scaling_min_freq to the maximum frequency, then there is going to be greater performance for those processors.

However, the benchmarks don't look too far off, so I don't know what's up. Thought I would point this out.